Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 Feb 2008

Vol. 648 No. 2

Motor Vehicle (Duties and Licences) Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the Motor Vehicle (Duties and Licences) Bill. I congratulate the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, on the initiative he is taking in bringing about changes to the VRT regulations for greener and more fuel-efficient cars. His initiative will, over time, bring about a considerable change in the attitude of the public towards energy efficient motoring and eventually will have a similar impact, but on a much larger scale, to the plastic bag levy introduced by his predecessor as Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government a number of years ago. However, the proposed VRT changes contain a number of anomalies which I hope the Minister will consider before finalising his proposals.

My background is in the motor trade. My late father had a Fiat Lancia main dealership which we ran from 1974 to 1987. In 1981, after leaving school, I worked in the business for seven years. The late 1970s and early 1980s were a good time in the motor industry. However, the industry then suffered from the penal duties placed on motor vehicles. The only political march on which I went was the "axe the tax" campaign in 1981 when the motor industry began to kick back at the level of punitive tax applied to it.

In the mid-1980s and the late 1980s we saw sales of between 50,000 and 60,000 new cars every year. In recent times, we achieved those figures in the month of January alone. I have a number of concerns about the introduction of this Bill and I hope amendments will be made during its passage through the Houses.

My brother and other family members still work in the industry and I am aware of the impact this Bill will have on car sales. The first aspect I question is the timing of the scheme. It would be much better to introduce it on 1 January. The motor industry changed considerably due to the changes made to the number plate. Many people purchase their car based on the incoming year's plate. Decisions on car purchase are made between September and December. This year, January car sales figures increased by 3.9%. For the first two weeks of February, car sales decreased by 18.5% and major concern exists that people will hold off on the purchase of cars until 1 July. The industry is also concerned that people will further put off purchases until January 2009. This will have an impact on the revenue due to the Government.

The Minister's intention is to influence the future buying habits of Irish motorists. All cars registered after 1 July will be taxed under the new regime. However, an individual who bought a fuel efficient car before now or who buys one between now and 1 July will still be taxed under the old system. Effectively, we will penalise those who cared for the environment before the Government decided to reward people for it.

In contrast, someone who imports a used car from England and registers it after 1 July will be taxed under the new system. This means that the same make, model and year of car will be taxed at two separate rates depending on whether it was originally bought in Ireland or imported from England and registered in Ireland after 1 July 2008. For example, an individual who purchased a new Volkswagen Golf diesel car in Ireland in 2006 will pay annual road tax of €560. However, someone who imports the same car from England after 1 July will pay only €150 per annum.

Unfortunately, the people who will be penalised under this anomaly will be those Irish motorists who cared enough for the environment to buy a lower emissions car before the introduction of this new standard. Not only will these motorists pay a higher rate of road tax each year, but the value of their cars may fall considerably relative to the value of imported cars and new cars registered after 1 July. This is a poor way of recognising motorists who bought cars on an environmental basis before it became profitable to do so. I hope that over the coming years we can address this issue and find a way to level the pitch.

The benefit in kind scheme which exists at present is mileage based. This is not very green when one considers that people are encouraged to reach a certain mileage and if they do not reach it they drive around the countryside to do so. This needs attention and the matter should be addressed.

In my home town of New Ross, the first biodiesel plant in the country is due to open its doors in the coming months. The targets for the use of biodiesel are between 3.5% and 5%. However, we have an opportunity to increase this dramatically through the use of biodiesel by commercial road transport fleets. I know of a number of fleet users in the UK which work on a 50-50 scheme whereby 50% biodiesel and 50% diesel are used. It seems to work well and we have a major opportunity to gain a green advantage through exploring such a system.

How accurate are measurements of engine emissions? Are we dependent on information given to us by motor manufacturers or do we have a way of measuring them ourselves? My understanding from the industry is that not all the measurements are accurate as there are different ways of testing emission levels. This is an area that could be examined on remaining Stages.

A myth exists that the smaller engine is the more economic one. This may not always be the case. In my motor trade days, I was always puzzled when people went for the 1.4 litre car as opposed to the 1.6 litre. Due to the power-to-weight ratio, the 1.6 litre was always more fuel efficient. Explaining that to a customer was nigh on impossible. When comparing a 1.4 litre petrol car to its 1.9 litre diesel model, people would be in for a pleasant surprise in that the larger engine will have a greener lean burn.

Last October when I changed my car, I bought a diesel one for the first time. I had always been a petrol-head for many years. Like Jeremy Clarkson on "Top Gear", I dreaded diesel, believing tractors were the only vehicles that should run on it.

Tractors are not the only vehicles to run on diesel.

This time when I changed, I went green. I am delighted with my choice as diesel engines have become very fuel efficient. To anyone considering changing their car, I recommend they choose the diesel option.

As well as penalising the environmentally conscious motorist, we are also creating problems for the motor industry. It will be difficult to sell new lower emission cars between now and 1 July 2008. The second-hand car market will suffer adverse effects for the next five years because it will be more advantageous for customers to purchase second-hand cars in England, import them to Ireland and then register them.

While I recognise the intentions behind the Minister's proposals and commend him on taking this initiative, I hope he will consider the impact this anomaly will have on both environmentally responsible motorists and on the motor industry. The most efficient way to overcome this anomaly would be to allow cars to be road taxed at the new environmental rates on renewal, provided these rates are lower than the current rates and that the CO2 data was recorded by the State at the time of registration.

A recent study undertaken on behalf of the Society of the Irish Motor Industry has shown the cost of making this change would come to €26.8 million. However, the study also showed that a decline of 1.5% in new car sales this year as a result of this anomaly could cost the Exchequer €27.8 million in lost VRT and VAT. These figures show the cost of implementing this proposal to rectify the loophole in the new regulations would be less than the potential lost revenue to the State than if allowed to stand. I urge the Minister to make this small amendment and allow all lower emission cars, irrespective of when they were first registered, to come under the new VRT regime.

The disabled drivers and disabled passengers scheme allows for the repayment of VRT and VAT on the purchase of a vehicle and the repayment of VAT on the adapting of a motor vehicle for use by a disabled driver or disabled passenger. It aims to offset some of the considerable costs involved in providing suitable transport for people with disabilities. The vehicles must have an engine size less than 2,000cc for a disabled driver and less than 4,000cc for a disabled passenger. The costs of VRT and VAT relating to purchasing and adapting the vehicle will be repaid up to a maximum of €9,525 for a disabled driver and €15,875 for a disabled passenger.

Unfortunately, these maximum repayment rates were set over 20 years ago and have not been increased since. The increase in the cost of motoring in that time means these rates no longer reflect the costs involved in purchasing a car and adapting it for use by a disabled driver or disabled passenger. The maximum engine size of 2,000cc for a disabled driver and 4,000cc for a disabled passenger places strong limitations on the ability of people with disabilities to choose a vehicle suitable to their needs.

I strongly urge the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to make considerable changes to the disabled drivers and disabled passengers scheme before the next budget. He should increase the maximum repayments rates for the first time in over 20 years, index link them in future, remove the maximum engine size of a vehicle that can be considered under this scheme and revise the medical criteria for applicants.

I commend the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, on introducing a new environmentally-based system of motor taxation. His proposals will have a profound impact on the motoring public in the years ahead. However, he must consider a small change to his proposals to end the anomaly which appears in his scheme.

I welcome the Bill.

I thank Deputy Connick for sharing his time. I commend him on the detail of his speech. It is clear he has a background in the motor industry and speaks with great knowledge on it.

I wish to address the motor tax increases, approved on 5 December 2007, and the new carbon budget and its linkage to motor tax with the move away from the old motor tax system determined on a vehicle's engine size.

While no Member would welcome a tax increase, the increases in the motor tax rate must be considered in their context. The increases will be ring-fenced for the local government fund which will improve the services provided by local authorities. These are also the first increases since 2004, the first in four years.

The Minister has proposed a 9.5% increase for cars below 2.2 litre engine size and 11% for cars with an engine size above this threshold. When communities see the benefit of the revenue generated by the local government fund, most reasonable people will understand it is worth paying the extra money. Recently, the Minister for Transport announced the regional and local roads programme for 2008, setting out an overall expenditure of €618 million. Funding for this will come from the local government fund. Motor tax proceeds in 2008 are anticipated to be €1.08 billion, a significant figure which will directly finance improvements to local government services and investment in roads.

I welcome some of the projects the fund has facilitated in the Cork South Central constituency, particularly the investment of €500,000 in the Carrigaline western relief road, €100,000 in the proposed Clarke's Hill-Moneygourney road improvement scheme and over €500,000 on the R610, Rochestown to Passage West road. I refer to these specific local projects because it is important for people to see the benefit of the motor tax they are paying. While it is easy to complain about an increase in motor tax rates, we also want to see improvements to the road network. If we can deliver those improvements in a timely and efficient manner, the majority will not be too critical of paying these increases.

Recently at the Joint Committee on Transport, the chief executive officer of the Road Safety Authority, Noel Brett, and the Garda Commissioner, Fachtna Murphy, went into some detail on road safety issues. They explained as 94% of the road network is constituted by local and regional roads, we need to continue to invest in the network to make it as safe as possible. The Minister's announcement of funding from the local government fund is particularly important in this regard.

The Bill's fundamental provision links motor taxation rates for new vehicles to CO2 emissions rather than engine size from 1 July. Engine size historically has been the determinant of motor tax but if we consider the purpose of what we are trying to achieve, it is quite a crude measure because it is CO2 that is the problem in terms of pollution and its contribution to global environmental issues such as climate change. If we consider that road transport generates 20% of CO2 emissions in the EU, with passenger cars representing more than half of this, we can begin to understand the contribution made by road-related transport to climate change. The carbon budget announced by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on the day following the budget in December, which is now being implemented through this Bill, will represent our contribution to solving this problem. Although this is a small country, we must play a leadership role in terms of addressing climate change. Given the contribution of CO2 emissions from road transport to environmental problems, it is important that we do this.

There has been some criticism of the Minister's decision to apply the new motor taxation system to new and pre-owned imported cars registered on or after 1 July 2008, and I note Deputy Connick's comments on linking VRT to CO2 emissions from that date and the potential impact on motor vehicle sales in 2008. It will balance out. We may well see a reduction in sales in the first half of the year compared to last year, but it is to be hoped that the second half of the year will compensate for this. There is of course a fear that some people will hold off on buying a new car until 2009, but when a fundamental change such as this is introduced, some anomalies will always be created, which will be washed out through the system over a period of time. The important thing is that we subscribe to the principle of what the Minister, Deputy Gormley, is seeking to achieve here: that as a country, we play a leading role in tackling climate change, particularly by linking motor taxation and VRT to carbon emissions rather than engine size. From 1 July motor tax for the most efficient new cars registered will start at €100, while under the current system the lowest motor tax rate is €165. Thus, there is a direct incentive for people who want to act responsibly and play their parts in tackling climate change. By buying a vehicle that is carbon efficient, people will earn a direct financial benefit.

I also welcome the new labelling system being introduced by the Minister from 1 July. It is particularly important that consumer-friendly information is available and is presented in a uniform and consistent manner to enable people to make conscious and informed decisions on the implications of this Bill for their buying patterns. I commend the Minister and thank the Ceann Comhairle for this time.

I wish to share time with Deputy Stanton.

I refer to the issue raised by Deputy Connick regarding the disabled drivers' scheme. While it may not be directly relevant to the Bill, it is important that we use the opportunity to highlight it once again. Deputy Connick mentioned the sizes of vehicles that are covered under the scheme. I wish to raise the specific issue of qualification for the scheme. There are many cases in my constituency of people who are in dire need of the disabled driver's allowance but are not allowed to enter the scheme. Although the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, is not directly involved with this scheme, he does have Cabinet responsibility for making sure that such issues are rectified. The scheme should be made usable, and it should be ensured that those who currently do not meet the regulations of having a disability such as having lost an arm or a leg but are still unable to drive without structural changes to their cars can avail of the scheme. I urge the Minister to act on this.

The Bill is just another means of fundraising. We can talk about technicalities such as the fact that the money raised goes to local government, but the Minister is giving with one hand and taking with the other. It is another form of taxation. The only reason it has been increased this year is that extra revenue was required. There is no point in trying to cover it up.

The previous speaker referred to a difficult issue. Many elderly people drive smaller cars because they are more suitable for them and because they suit their budgets. Under the new regime, there will be an anomaly straight away whereby somebody who buys a car with the lowest level of CO2 emissions and so on will get away with paying €100 of tax per year, while his or her colleague who happens to have the same car but bought earlier this year, or five or ten years ago, will pay €165. I do not think it would make a major difference to the overall budget to change the regulations, from 1 July or whatever date the Minister chooses, so that cars that are already in the system can be brought into the new system, at both the lower and higher tax levels. We must remember that those who want to buck the system — I do not apologise for using that word — by buying gas-guzzlers that will contribute to the destruction of the environment have from now until July to do that, and they are guaranteed not to have to pay the new rate of tax. Thus, it works both ways. I ask the Minister to reconsider this.

Deputy Connick referred to the fact he had just bought a diesel car. For the record, I have been driving a diesel car as long as I can remember, because I thought it was a better system. It has now been proven beyond doubt that it is better to drive a diesel car. People have used all sorts of public gimmicks to make out that they were in favour of this. I started driving a diesel car in the early 1980s — 1981 or 1982 at the latest——

Fair play to the Deputy.

——when I became involved in farm organisation and was doing more than 40,000 miles per year.

The Minister referred in his speech to supplementing the annual Exchequer fund towards roads. Currently local government is funded not just by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, but by charging for water. The Minister said recently that we are paying only a nominal rate compared to some other European countries, but we have increased that by charging for both water in and water out. This has caused serious problems for industry. There is also the issue of capital charges. In a town in my county, the allocation of a significant amount of money for a sewerage scheme was recently announced. I will not give any names to avoid causing difficulties for the company concerned. Everybody thought this was a Government grant, but they later found out that the Government's contribution was a small percentage of the total and that industry and others would have to pay massive capital sums towards the project. I ask the Minister to reconsider this before too much damage is done. If the sum of which I heard has to be paid by one company, it may mean the company, which employs large numbers of people in the town, will no longer be there. We must ensure that a balance is struck.

As one who lives on a regional road I appreciate the Minister's comments on funding regional and county roads. I refer to the spatial strategy and regional development. In recent months the Minister announced that in parts of County Monaghan one cannot build unless one has owned land for the past ten years. The Minister should think that over again if his statement on spatial strategy is to mean anything. County Monaghan has the lowest increase in population in Ireland, yet impositions are made without any thought. This has serious implications and I ask the Minister to re-examine it.

The Minister referred to the increase in prices. While there was no increase in taxation over the past few years, there was an enormous increase in the number of vehicles. The funding increased without the price increasing.

I refer to changes in CO2. As one who lives within a few miles of the Border, in an area where much of our business is done across the Border, I am more conscious than most of how these regulations work. I warn the Minister that, unless he changes some of the systems in July, it will encourage people to buy second-hand cars north of the Border, in England or elsewhere. Someone buying a car that has been taxed before 1 July in the South will find that the car will be burdened with a high level of road tax for the rest of its life. Buying a similar car north of the Border or elsewhere in Europe is not in the interests of the economy in the long term. I appreciate it any time the Minister tries to do something positive. Fine Gael has pushed for recognition of lower levels of CO2 emissions. I urge the Minister to re-examine this matter.

Fine Gael is in favour of the changes in CO2 emissions but opposes this structure, which will cause difficulty for second-hand cars. If we cannot sell our cars to garages because they cannot get rid of them, it will increase the cost indirectly. There are implications and I encourage the Minister to re-examine this issue.

I welcome the legislation and support any environmentally friendly effort to reduce CO2 emissions. I encourage the Minister along this road, if Members will pardon the pun, because much needs to be done in this area.

Ireland is becoming car dependent. When I and the Minister were growing up, that was not the case. People cycled and walked much more. It is now part of our culture in that we are inclined to rush from A to B. People do not seem to have time, they want to drop their children at the door of the school and park as close as possible to the shop door.

This is a welcome first step, encouraging people to purchase cars with low emissions. There are a number of anomalies in this Bill, which my colleagues have pointed out, regarding importing cars. I hope the Minister will deal with those anomalies on Committee and Report Stages.

I travel by public transport when I can and I enjoy it. I had to drive today from Cork to Dublin. It was fine until I encountered serious traffic congestion in Dublin, which has improved. I noticed the number of single occupants in large cars. We must encourage people to car share.

We must encourage children to cycle to school. One of the issues is that the roads are dangerous and parents are afraid of allowing children to cycle. A related issue is the weight of school bags, which is appalling. I have a child of 12 years of age and I can hardly lift the bag. Putting that on the back of a bicycle is dangerous. Another reason children do not cycle is because of the amount of gear they have, with PE gear and school bags. If he wants children to cycle to school, the Minister should speak with the Minister for Education and Science and ask her to talk to publishers about reducing the size of books. When I was in school we had a book for every year. Nowadays, there are three in one tome, massive encyclopedias that youngsters carry around. This discourages children from cycling or walking.

In years to come, we could see the Department with responsibility for education before the courts. Adults may claim that their backs were damaged because they were forced to carry heavy bags to school as children. We had cases of army deafness. I served for 25 years in the FCA. At one stage I was told not to wear ear muffs because they were not issued to me. I did not claim anything but many others did. In 15 or 20 years time adults may approach the State and claim that they were forced, through the Department of Education and Science, to carry heavy books to school as children and that the State did nothing to protect them. They may also claim they were unable to cycle because of it. I know the Minister is genuine about this matter and I want him to speak to the Minister for Education and Science because she will not listen to me.

In rural areas, many landowners do not cut their hedgerows. I do not know if responsibility for this matter lies with the Department of Transport or the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. If hedgerows are not cut, it is dangerous to walk or cycle on roads. It is a simple issue but we do not seem to have clear lines of responsibility. Local authorities should be instructed by the Minister in charge to ensure hedgerows are cut back so that pedestrians and cyclists can see where they are going. This will encourage more people to walk and cycle and cut emissions, which is the aim of this Bill.

People are driving too fast on rural roads and speed limits need to be reduced. Road signs in many areas are absolutely filthy. This may be within the Minister's remit and is slightly off the point of this Bill. However, whichever Minister is responsible should tell the local authorities to wash the blasted signs. It gives a bad indication to visitors and locals. Road signs are covered with red algae or they are black and dirty. Washing them is a simple thing and I do not know why it cannot be done.

Some people must have large, powerful vehicles because of the work they do. Is there a danger that they may be penalised unfairly? I refer to those who work on the land or in forestry and need large vehicles to pull heavy loads. The Minister might respond to that matter.

The other issue I wish to raise is non-nationals bringing cars to this country and the enforcement of vehicle registration of imported cars. A large number of cars are brought into this country. Under the legislation they must be registered within one year but there are difficulties with registration and insurance. The fact that many of the cars are left-hand drive is also a problem. Overtaking is not easy when driving a left-hand drive car due to the visibility problem. We must ensure that these foreign registered vehicles are re-registered in this country and made liable for Irish motor tax and insurance. This might have to be done at European level. The emissions from these cars are also an issue because some of them are quite old. How is that to be dealt with? It is not safe to have too many left-hand drive cars in the country. The Minister should deal with this.

I welcome any initiative that will reduce CO2 emissions and encourage people to walk, cycle and buy smaller cars. Perhaps the table of charges should be more graduated to promote the use of smaller cars. People should be encouraged to share cars. However, the issue of people who require large vehicles for their business or employment must be examined. Other speakers have mentioned the condition of minor roads, a matter that is probably under the remit of the Department of Transport but affects motor vehicles. If those roads are in very bad condition, as many of them are with potholes and so forth, it will damage cars. I urge the Government and local authorities to ensure that these roads are maintained to a high standard.

I thank all Deputies who contributed to this debate and, in particular, I welcome the broad support for the move to an emissions based approach to motor tax. I have listened carefully to the points raise by Deputies and I will address them as far as possible in these remarks. In my contribution on Second Stage last Wednesday, I made it clear that the sole reason for increasing motor tax rates in respect of the existing fleet was to fund local government. I made no bones about that. The increases in motor tax rates, at 9.5% for the majority of the fleet, are well below the rate of inflation since the last increase in rates in 2004. The increases for 95% of the car fleet are between 27 cent and 98 cent per week.

All motor tax receipts go into the local government fund. The fund plays a significant role in financing local government and there is a need to maintain it. Motor tax receipts represent some 60% of the local government fund, which is ring-fenced exclusively for local government; it cannot be used for any other purpose. The increase in motor tax rates is about local government. It is about ensuring that local government is well resourced and is in a position adequately to perform its functions and to provide quality public services across its wide range of activities. Deputies cannot have it both ways. Failure to raise funding through increased motor tax rates would have resulted in significantly reduced allocations to local authorities for 2008 for general purpose funding and for regional and local roads.

Total funding for the local government fund for 2008 is estimated at €1.6 billion, which represents approximately 30% of local authority current funding requirements. The motor tax increases have enabled me to provide for substantial increases in the record levels of funding provided to local authorities in 2007 for general purpose funding and for regional and local roads. In 2008, I have allocated €999 million in general purpose grants to local authorities while €565 million is being provided from the local government fund towards the development and maintenance of the regional and local road network. I am determined that local government will prosper and to ensure that local government remains meaningful and effective in supporting social and economic development across the country. It is for this reason that I have increased motor tax rates.

Deputies have referred to the importance of addressing climate change. Climate change is profound in its implications for the planet and its inhabitants and represents a significant challenge to society. It cuts to the core of modern living and commercial activity. While, in global terms, Ireland's emissions may be relatively small, it is essential that we address the challenge of adapting to a low carbon society. With our EU colleagues, we were to the forefront in bringing the Kyoto Protocol into force. Our efforts to secure global agreement on deep cuts in emissions must be backed up by a commensurate level of ambition at home. The programme for Government and the carbon budget which I delivered last December make it clear that we are up for that challenge.

The move to an emissions based approach to motor tax, which I announced in my carbon budget, gives effect to the commitment in the programme for Government to introduce measures to rebalance motor tax in favour of cars with lower CO2 emissions. It complements the new CO2 based VRT system which is provided for in the Finance Bill. I listened carefully to the points raised by Deputies regarding the introduction of the new motor tax system. They raised issues relating to the starting date for the new system and the possible implications of second-hand imports for the existing fleet. I have examined many of the issues raised and, while some of the proposals put forward would result in certain anomalies, I am giving further consideration to them. I believe there is some scope to bring forward amendments on Committee Stage to address some of the concerns expressed by the Deputies.

I have always said I will listen to good ideas from the Opposition. I thank Deputy Stanton and Deputy Crawford for their constructive remarks. Deputy Stanton was correct in identifying some of the problems that lead to greater car dependency. Clearly, there is a problem with speeding on the roads. I have visited rural areas often and while I consider the cities dangerous enough for cyclists, the rural roads are lethal for them and pedestrians. People drive like rally drivers on many of them. This must be addressed. Deputy Stanton also correctly identified the problem of the weight of schoolbags which is preventing many children from walking and cycling to school. Indeed, I notice many children no longer carry bags on their backs but, as if they are travelling abroad, use wheeled cases for their books. I agree it is preventing children from walking or cycling to school but we must, in the first instance, make it safer for children to cycle to school. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, is giving a great deal of consideration to that in the context of his new sustainable transport plan.

Deputy Lynch queried the likely impact of the new motor tax regime on carbon emissions. The national climate change strategy includes the quantified effects of a range of measures in the various sectors. A combined annual saving of 50,000 tonnes is attributed to the rebalancing of motor tax and vehicle registration tax and the introduction of an enhanced vehicle label. This saving is based on indicative calculations contained in a study prepared by Sustainable Energy Ireland and referenced in a report on greenhouse gas emissions projections prepared for my Department in 2006.

As it would not have been possible for the study to assess the impacts of the actual motor tax and VRT changes announced in budget 2008, it is necessary to update the estimate of the saving from these changes. Factors which will be taken into account include the significant increase in car ownership in recent years, the average annual mileage of vehicles in Ireland, the rate of fleet renewal and the projected impact of the tax changes on purchasing patterns. I have indicated that I will present updated figures where appropriate for relevant measures in the context of my annual report to the Oireachtas on the implementation of the national climate change strategy. I envisage that this report will be ready by the end of April.

I thank Deputies for their thoughtful and considered views and I look forward to further consideration of the issues on Committee Stage.

Go raibh maith agat a Aire. That concludes the Second Stage debate.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share